The Spirit of Rush Fanzine Archive - Now Online

[Jag2112]

I'm proud to announce a new, exclusive feature to the Cygnus-X1.Net: A Tribute to Rush website - the official and complete archive of the Spirit of Rush Fanzine. The Spirit of Rush was launched back in 1987 and ran for over fifteen years. In over sixty published issues, the fanzine brought Rush news, articles, reviews, concert updates, fan art, exclusive band interviews and so much more to fans around the globe.

 

Over the past month or so, I've been working with a previous contributor as well as a co-editor of the fanzine, both who graciously allowed me to not only borrow all of the issues of the fanzine, but also scan and publish them online. To begin with, the first ten issues of the fanzine are available now at the new Spirit of Rush Archive. Moving forward, new issues will be published in chronological order at the rate of approximately one a week.

 

As the members of Rush are taking their well-earned break as they - and we - head into the band's 40th anniversary next year, I thought it fitting to highlight the passion Rush fans have had throughout their career. The Spirit of Rush fanzine was without question the epitome of Rush fandom back in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's. I hope you enjoy this special look back at the history of Rush from a fans-eye view.

 

Very special thanks to Monica Zimmerman and Janet Balmer for their generosity, support and encouragement in bringing this archive online.

 

To learn more about The Spirit of Rush and to access the archive, please click HERE.

[EagleMoon]

Nice! Too bad the print is so tiny though, I can hardly read it.

[Jag2112]

Nice! Too bad the print is so tiny though, I can hardly read it.

 

You can quick-click to enlarge or view each issue as a PDF ... see the bottom of each page for the PDF link...

[EagleMoon]

Nice! Too bad the print is so tiny though, I can hardly read it.

 

You can quick-click to enlarge or view each issue as a PDF ... see the bottom of each page for the PDF link...

 

I had tried the enlarge feature but it was still really small. The PDF link though worked fine. Thanks.

[Bluefunk]

Oh wow, that really shook me up clicking on a link and seeing Mick's face!

 

Back in 1987, I thought I was the only Rush fan in the universe, so to see a little advertisment in Kerrang! offering subscription to a Rush fanzine was like a lifeline. Through that fanzine I learned so much about Rush, and I met so many lovely people at the conventions. I wrote some articles for The Spirit Of Rush, did some artwork for a cover, gained some pen pals and made many friends. And, I got to learn that I wasn't the only Rush fan- we were actually quite a prolific breed! I even got Mick up on stage to sing Rush Karaoke once!

 

I remember being in tears at that last convention after Mick died. I still have all of my copies of 'The Spirit Of Rush', so I'm really glad that this archive is being made so that others can read the information Mick collected. Thank you, Jag2112!

[ytserush]

Great job guys!

 

Wow, this brings back memories. I discovered these in the late '80s in New York City when I made my Rush bootleg runs.

 

Issue 8 is how I discovered Dream Theater after picking it up at Revolver Records. Later, I was a subscriber and was able to get all of the back issues.

 

I actually called Mick a few times to straighten out some subscription problems. Nice bloke. Found out about his passing online.

 

The issues became more difficult to get in the later years because of US distribution problems. I think I'm missing about 15 issues, mostly the later ones and while I'm still on the lookout for them it will be nice to at least peek at them online. I was never able to determine how many issues there were. I think the last one I managed to get hold of was around the Vapor Trails era.

[Ancient Ways]

I miss fanzines. For those not in the know, these were big in the 80s. I subscribed to a few underground metal zines back around 82-85. It's how I learned about a lot of bands like venom, Celtic frost, merciful fate, etc...

[Bluefunk]

I had completely forgotten about Neil Peart's letter to Mick Burnett:

Which raises a point which has troubled me a bit.

I was surprised by the tone of some of the letters you printed from other readers of "The Spirit Of Rush". So much of it seemed to be just plain negative - I mean, there was so much complaining. That struck me as a pretty strange attitude to find on the pages of a "fanzine", a kind of open forum for everybody's gripes about the band. It's certainly something I've never seen before in similar publications, dealing with us or any other band.

 

I can hardly remember them all now, but there seemed to be a lot of whingeing about stuff like our choice of songs on A Show Of Hands, our choice of songs for the video, the approach we took to the video, the quality of individual performances in our concerts, and even some pretty personal and insulting stuff, like people questioning whether Alex can play as well as he used to (of course not - he's way better!), and even some bizarre crack about whether my ideas (at least, my ideas as interpreted by others) were maybe the result of my lack of education.

 

I mean, give me a break! Snotty, snotty, snotty.

 

Everybody is entitled to his or her opinion, of course, and obviously we as a band can't please everybody all the time, nor do we even try. Still, I fail to see the need for, or purpose of, this kind of nit-picking and crabby criticism. But then I always have a problem with negativity - I've never understood the point of vicious reviews of anyone's work, and I've written to magazines like Modern Drummer in the past wondering why they bother printing letters like: "What do you mean Joe Bloggs is a great drummer? He stinks."

 

But in context of "The Spirit of Rush", when I think about it deeper and try to imagine the mindset of the person who sits down to put these things on paper and send them to you, I have to wonder: Now really - who do these people think they are?

 

Don't they think we have reasons for our actions, or is it that our reasons and actions are supposed to be subservient to their opinions and reactions? To my way of thinking - possibly limited by my lack of formal education - reason and action win out over opinion and reaction. Wishes and expectations aside, we have to deal with realities. It is G. Lee, A. Lifeson, and N.Peart who have to make the decisions, and it's our names which go on in the end. In any case, apart from artistic questions, which are ours alone, our more general decisions are always tempered by consideration for our fans. For example, the limitations we faced in assembling A Show Of Hands were based on the desire to keep the package to one CD, so that the growing number of people who prefer that format wouldn't be expected to pay for two CDs just for the sake of an extra song or two - or for the complete drum solo. We faced that difficult limitation in choosing the songs, and I had to face it in regard to "The Rhythm Method": In the three minutes and forty-one seconds available, would I rather include an edited version of my solo, or leave it out entirely? My edit was my answer.

 

But hey, I don't want to go on all day about this. This letter is supposed to be a positive response to your efforts, and to your appreciation of our work, not a diatribe against the piss-and-moaners of the world. It just struck me as strange, that's all. I guess my bottom line response to all these people would be: If you think a band should be run differently, start your own and do it your way. That's what we did.

 

http://www.cygnus-x1...ush/tsor-10.php

[Ancient Ways]

I had completely forgotten about Neil Peart's letter to Mick Burnett:

Which raises a point which has troubled me a bit.

I was surprised by the tone of some of the letters you printed from other readers of "The Spirit Of Rush". So much of it seemed to be just plain negative - I mean, there was so much complaining. That struck me as a pretty strange attitude to find on the pages of a "fanzine", a kind of open forum for everybody's gripes about the band. It's certainly something I've never seen before in similar publications, dealing with us or any other band.

 

I can hardly remember them all now, but there seemed to be a lot of whingeing about stuff like our choice of songs on A Show Of Hands, our choice of songs for the video, the approach we took to the video, the quality of individual performances in our concerts, and even some pretty personal and insulting stuff, like people questioning whether Alex can play as well as he used to (of course not - he's way better!), and even some bizarre crack about whether my ideas (at least, my ideas as interpreted by others) were maybe the result of my lack of education.

 

I mean, give me a break! Snotty, snotty, snotty.

 

Everybody is entitled to his or her opinion, of course, and obviously we as a band can't please everybody all the time, nor do we even try. Still, I fail to see the need for, or purpose of, this kind of nit-picking and crabby criticism. But then I always have a problem with negativity - I've never understood the point of vicious reviews of anyone's work, and I've written to magazines like Modern Drummer in the past wondering why they bother printing letters like: "What do you mean Joe Bloggs is a great drummer? He stinks."

 

But in context of "The Spirit of Rush", when I think about it deeper and try to imagine the mindset of the person who sits down to put these things on paper and send them to you, I have to wonder: Now really - who do these people think they are?

 

Don't they think we have reasons for our actions, or is it that our reasons and actions are supposed to be subservient to their opinions and reactions? To my way of thinking - possibly limited by my lack of formal education - reason and action win out over opinion and reaction. Wishes and expectations aside, we have to deal with realities. It is G. Lee, A. Lifeson, and N.Peart who have to make the decisions, and it's our names which go on in the end. In any case, apart from artistic questions, which are ours alone, our more general decisions are always tempered by consideration for our fans. For example, the limitations we faced in assembling A Show Of Hands were based on the desire to keep the package to one CD, so that the growing number of people who prefer that format wouldn't be expected to pay for two CDs just for the sake of an extra song or two - or for the complete drum solo. We faced that difficult limitation in choosing the songs, and I had to face it in regard to "The Rhythm Method": In the three minutes and forty-one seconds available, would I rather include an edited version of my solo, or leave it out entirely? My edit was my answer.

 

But hey, I don't want to go on all day about this. This letter is supposed to be a positive response to your efforts, and to your appreciation of our work, not a diatribe against the piss-and-moaners of the world. It just struck me as strange, that's all. I guess my bottom line response to all these people would be: If you think a band should be run differently, start your own and do it your way. That's what we did.

 

http://www.cygnus-x1...ush/tsor-10.php

 

I guess we have to accept that he's destined to come across like a jerk sometimes even if he makes a valid point. I guess he's not alone in that though.

[ytserush]

I had completely forgotten about Neil Peart's letter to Mick Burnett:

Which raises a point which has troubled me a bit.

I was surprised by the tone of some of the letters you printed from other readers of "The Spirit Of Rush". So much of it seemed to be just plain negative - I mean, there was so much complaining. That struck me as a pretty strange attitude to find on the pages of a "fanzine", a kind of open forum for everybody's gripes about the band. It's certainly something I've never seen before in similar publications, dealing with us or any other band.

 

I can hardly remember them all now, but there seemed to be a lot of whingeing about stuff like our choice of songs on A Show Of Hands, our choice of songs for the video, the approach we took to the video, the quality of individual performances in our concerts, and even some pretty personal and insulting stuff, like people questioning whether Alex can play as well as he used to (of course not - he's way better!), and even some bizarre crack about whether my ideas (at least, my ideas as interpreted by others) were maybe the result of my lack of education.

 

I mean, give me a break! Snotty, snotty, snotty.

 

Everybody is entitled to his or her opinion, of course, and obviously we as a band can't please everybody all the time, nor do we even try. Still, I fail to see the need for, or purpose of, this kind of nit-picking and crabby criticism. But then I always have a problem with negativity - I've never understood the point of vicious reviews of anyone's work, and I've written to magazines like Modern Drummer in the past wondering why they bother printing letters like: "What do you mean Joe Bloggs is a great drummer? He stinks."

 

But in context of "The Spirit of Rush", when I think about it deeper and try to imagine the mindset of the person who sits down to put these things on paper and send them to you, I have to wonder: Now really - who do these people think they are?

 

Don't they think we have reasons for our actions, or is it that our reasons and actions are supposed to be subservient to their opinions and reactions? To my way of thinking - possibly limited by my lack of formal education - reason and action win out over opinion and reaction. Wishes and expectations aside, we have to deal with realities. It is G. Lee, A. Lifeson, and N.Peart who have to make the decisions, and it's our names which go on in the end. In any case, apart from artistic questions, which are ours alone, our more general decisions are always tempered by consideration for our fans. For example, the limitations we faced in assembling A Show Of Hands were based on the desire to keep the package to one CD, so that the growing number of people who prefer that format wouldn't be expected to pay for two CDs just for the sake of an extra song or two - or for the complete drum solo. We faced that difficult limitation in choosing the songs, and I had to face it in regard to "The Rhythm Method": In the three minutes and forty-one seconds available, would I rather include an edited version of my solo, or leave it out entirely? My edit was my answer.

 

But hey, I don't want to go on all day about this. This letter is supposed to be a positive response to your efforts, and to your appreciation of our work, not a diatribe against the piss-and-moaners of the world. It just struck me as strange, that's all. I guess my bottom line response to all these people would be: If you think a band should be run differently, start your own and do it your way. That's what we did.

 

http://www.cygnus-x1...ush/tsor-10.php

 

That letter struck a particular chord with me when I read it at the time because I questioned the edited drum solo and leaving off the first 43 seconds or so of Witch Hunt.when I reviewed the album for my school newspaper. Of course at the time the reasons for it weren't readily available To this day I always think of 'My edit is my answer" whenever I hear Witch Hunt or the drum solo from that album.

[Bluefunk]

Jag has put issue #11 up on the Cygnus X-1 site now. :)

[LedRush]

I had completely forgotten about Neil Peart's letter to Mick Burnett:

Which raises a point which has troubled me a bit.

I was surprised by the tone of some of the letters you printed from other readers of "The Spirit Of Rush". So much of it seemed to be just plain negative - I mean, there was so much complaining. That struck me as a pretty strange attitude to find on the pages of a "fanzine", a kind of open forum for everybody's gripes about the band. It's certainly something I've never seen before in similar publications, dealing with us or any other band.

 

I can hardly remember them all now, but there seemed to be a lot of whingeing about stuff like our choice of songs on A Show Of Hands, our choice of songs for the video, the approach we took to the video, the quality of individual performances in our concerts, and even some pretty personal and insulting stuff, like people questioning whether Alex can play as well as he used to (of course not - he's way better!), and even some bizarre crack about whether my ideas (at least, my ideas as interpreted by others) were maybe the result of my lack of education.

 

I mean, give me a break! Snotty, snotty, snotty.

 

Everybody is entitled to his or her opinion, of course, and obviously we as a band can't please everybody all the time, nor do we even try. Still, I fail to see the need for, or purpose of, this kind of nit-picking and crabby criticism. But then I always have a problem with negativity - I've never understood the point of vicious reviews of anyone's work, and I've written to magazines like Modern Drummer in the past wondering why they bother printing letters like: "What do you mean Joe Bloggs is a great drummer? He stinks."

 

But in context of "The Spirit of Rush", when I think about it deeper and try to imagine the mindset of the person who sits down to put these things on paper and send them to you, I have to wonder: Now really - who do these people think they are?

 

Don't they think we have reasons for our actions, or is it that our reasons and actions are supposed to be subservient to their opinions and reactions? To my way of thinking - possibly limited by my lack of formal education - reason and action win out over opinion and reaction. Wishes and expectations aside, we have to deal with realities. It is G. Lee, A. Lifeson, and N.Peart who have to make the decisions, and it's our names which go on in the end. In any case, apart from artistic questions, which are ours alone, our more general decisions are always tempered by consideration for our fans. For example, the limitations we faced in assembling A Show Of Hands were based on the desire to keep the package to one CD, so that the growing number of people who prefer that format wouldn't be expected to pay for two CDs just for the sake of an extra song or two - or for the complete drum solo. We faced that difficult limitation in choosing the songs, and I had to face it in regard to "The Rhythm Method": In the three minutes and forty-one seconds available, would I rather include an edited version of my solo, or leave it out entirely? My edit was my answer.

 

But hey, I don't want to go on all day about this. This letter is supposed to be a positive response to your efforts, and to your appreciation of our work, not a diatribe against the piss-and-moaners of the world. It just struck me as strange, that's all. I guess my bottom line response to all these people would be: If you think a band should be run differently, start your own and do it your way. That's what we did.

 

http://www.cygnus-x1...ush/tsor-10.php

 

Imagine how pissed he'd be if he read this forum. I think he'd strangle RushGoober.

[Amos111]

This is really GREAT stuff. This is what a Rush Fan needs. EXCELLENT!

[Jaminbenb]

Wow great! I have about 6-8 of these in a box with other Rush stuff... I also have some stuff Mick sent me when I first made contact with him, and a letter from him in his own handwriting! (and a copy of his "bootleg" list...that pretty much brought my attention to THAT hobby!) Nice guy to talk to via snail mail whenever I renewed! RIP!

[drumstruck]

John, just wanted to put a 'thank-you' out there for making these scans available. I have been reading through them and enjoying the walk down memory lane. So true that info like this was difficult to find about the band back in the pre-internet days.

Thanks for this and all you do at Cygnus-X1.net

[Bluefunk]

Issues #12 and #13 are available now! :)

[Bluefunk]

Cygnus-X1.net is up to issue #15 of SOR now, lots of great interviews to read!